Message from @Bobamelius
Discord ID: 467173082981990402
We need to make sure our people our taken care of so any chance to go the democrat way requires actively fucking the American people to do their nonsense.
I love how he roasted those EU fags
Let Russia eat them alive.
Then we can have trade deals with just Russia.
bu-bu- muh russain collusion
Please if the russians could rig the election the dems would have done it
USS Tennessee (BB-43) , 1943
While only using 14inch guns, the Tennessee and her sister ship USS California (BB-44) were considered some of the most powerful ships in the US navy in 1941.
Both ships would survive Pearl Harbor, however they'd be damaged to the point where by the time they were back in service newer and more modern ships had completely outclassed them.
In 1944 however they'd get one last shot at fame when they engaged the two Japanese battleships that they'd been built in response to. the IJN Fuso and IJN Yamashiro and along with the aid of their escorts sank both ships.
Back when the name California was cool
USS Missouri leading USS Iowa into Tokyo Bay, Japan, August 30th, 1945. destroyer USS Nicholas in escort.
If she hadn't been damaged in a battle beforehand the USS Enterprise would have been the ship to accept the Japanese surrender instead of the Missouri.
i love warships
it's a shame the days of naval combat are pretty much over
at least manly lead-slinging combat
one of these days i want to go around the world and look at different countries' museum ships
shame the bismarck, tirpitz, yamato and musashi were all destroyed. would've been hella impressive to be able to see them in person
At least the americans have 8 battleships left and Greece has a Pre-ww1 battlescruiser
Know what would give me a freedom boner? Nuclear powered battleships w/ railguns instead of conventional guns ❤ Sadly there's no justifications for it lmao
yeah by the time railguns are tenable they will be able to just fit them on destroyers.
which i still am not sure why the navy is pursuing railguns, earth's curvature puts a hard limit on the range of something with a shallow firing arc like that
aircraft mounted railguns, though...
that might actually be a really efficient weapons system, just collect solar energy to power it and fire low-mass inert projectiles through it... easy to get into orbit and rearm, compared to missiles or something
With our focus on anti-missile tech, I can't say it's too crazy that we'd also be researching tech for (relatively) close combat that wouldn't be able to be stopped by the same tech.
that's fair. still, being limited to within 20-30 miles of the coast kinda sucks
That's international waters baby, totally legal to patrol ❤ Then when ya need to, BOOM.
Don't get me wrong, being able to strike from the other side of the world is pretty hot too, but it's nice seeing sci-fi tech come to fruitation. Gives you hope for the future, yanno?
yeah it's cool
i'd be concerned about weaponizing space though tbh
going back to orbital railguns or something, that just gives the controller of that system the ability to obliterate anything you want, anywhere at any time without any of the consequences of deploying nukes
that's a lot of power to put in the hands of one government with no balancing
i think we signed a treaty or something not to weaponize space, but with the whole space force thing not sure if that's out the window or not
From my understand we've signed a treaty that doesn't allow for WMDs in space
But ship to ship or ship to satellite "combat" should be fair game
And let's be honest, if you took out a country's satellites and disallowed use of your own to them they'd be struggling
"It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications (Article IV)"
"However, the Treaty does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit and thus some highly destructive attack strategies such as kinetic bombardment are still potentially allowable."
i guess that answers my question
Honestly from what I'd heard about kinetic bombardment I figured they'd be classified under WMDs, but ey I'm not complaining lol
there's probably a line somewhere where it becomes a WMD if it destroys a large enough area or something
ie the size and speed of projectiles you're sending down